Reply

Author

Email

Date/Time

04 Mar 2015 8:08:22am

Text

PreviousMessage

I'm not convinced that growth economics is the best way to deliver everyone from poverty. Instead, it seems to me that growth is stripping people - particularly the world's poor - of the ecosystems, resources, and favourable climate that they need to survive.

The whole point of limiting growth in consumption and population is to ensure that there are sufficient resources available for everyone. Having access to essentials like food, fresh water, and a healthy environment is the true measure of wealth.

People need to re-think what matters to them and fear mongering about becoming 'poorer' in a lowest common denominator kind of way doesn't help. A steady state system would be less profligate, not impoverished. There is a big difference.

So what would a 'steady state' type of community or civilisation really look like? Well, it would probably involve taking up a simpler and healthier lifestyle for most of us. Perhaps communities like the Amish - who are already 'solar powered' in a sense - provide a good example of the kind of lifestyles we all need to start looking at.